Body armor, biomedical, and unmanned aircraft are nice and all... but what I really want to know is when will this super-plastic will be used in new cars?!
For years cars have been getting heavier and heavier in the name of safety. It's about time someone comes up with something to make cars LIGHTER! While my motivation is purely motivated for better performance, there's got to be some practical benefits such as fuel economy for lighter (faster) cars!!
avoid Dell, too, since the American government is doing such horrible things around the world. Yes, it's flawed logic. Move on.
Agreed. While I appreciate your willingness to take a personal stance, there's little-to-no chance of buying consumer electronics 100% guilt-free. That's not the world we live in.
If you do want to ease your conscience and support a good cause, how about OLPC? http://www.xogiving.org/
You're dead wrong and you're missing the point entirely, like so many posts below (and before).
This IS is price gouging, plain and simple. Worse than that, it is HORRIBLE customer relations, at time when perhaps Apple should be riding their impressive market upturn. From my own perspective, having just come on board with Apple last year with the switch to intel processors, I was beginning to appreciate the Apple OS _and_ philosophy. I own two Mac Mini's, one MacBook, and now an iPhone. All along, I was happy to pay the marked price premium... for design, aesthetic AND, well thought out interfaces (usability/function). THIS is what apple sells and why they are more "exclusive" (highly regarded/perceived). I see the he "apple tax" not so much a "look at me, look what I have". It is the price for superior engineering. There is (was) greater VALUE in Apple products due not only to their design, but due to their intuitive function.... Until now.
Bottom-line, this was a HORRIBLE move by Apple. People can turn the cold shoulder, claiming early adopters got what they (we) deserve and that they are being unreasonable. I say, those calling this anything but a kick in the teeth are blind or vindictive. Ala, Nelson Munch... "Haha".
Never before, that I'm aware of, has there been such a sudden and drastic price drop on the latest must have gadget. More than harming Apple's credibility, I'm thinking many who would have continued being early adopter consumers may now think again before opening our wallets. Hell! Perhaps Apple has done us a favor, brining us to our senses? Still, is this a lessen Job wants in on? Is this his form of social commentary?? Talk about biting the hand that feeds.
7) Categorize contacts/memos
For what it's worth, contacts can be categorized using Address Book on Mac. Haven't tried doing the same on PC/Outlook, but I imagine it would do the same.
No idea why the ability to categorize ON the phone wasn't included. Then again, many of the omissions of this phone baffle me (GPS, multiple SMS recipients, MMS, iChat, etc).
As someone already posted down a bit further, aside from 3G, the most critical features missing I estimate are:
How frustrating!! Both the slashdot article title and that submitted by the anonymous users are decidedly misleading. "Fight off the independent iPhone developers" is NOT the same as protecting the phone against being unlocked, which is what Jobs addressed.
When I first saw the title of this article I was concerned that Apple had decided to actively block iPhone app developement. Here I was thinking to myself, if Apple decides to lock out the amazing plethora of third party apps already out there, I'm done.
In my experience as a sysadmin for 350 node hospital, wireless networks are far too prone to intermittent failure. In all fairness, I've yet to implement enterprise level wireless routers, for the main reason that most hardware claiming "industrial strength" tends to price itself more than simply running lines.
How long did it take before the PS3 and Zune dropped 15%, 8 months? Both of those figures are a far cry from 2 months and 30%.
My point is that had Apple waited 6 months and only dropped the price 15%, AS IS THE NORM, I would not be so disappointed. As is, EVEN with a $100 STORE CREDIT, Apple screwed up on this one. No company has ever made such a large and quick price drop on a new tech product for a simple reason, it's absolutely horrible for customer retention.
$100 store credit is a slap in the face. $200 STORE CREDIT would have been a nice gesture. As is, Apple is only digging themselves deeper in my estimation. Attempting to lure customers to spend MORE money in your store after such an ridiculous pricing debacle is disappointing... I would expect better of Apple.
Your analogies are close, but miss the real point.
Yes, tech toys have and will always depreciate greatly in the first YEAR or more. Any tech-addict can tell you this. Any honest tech-addict will also tell you they are willingly (knowingly) paying the early adopter "fee". Similarly, most as Apple customers are happy (and aware) they are paying the Apple premium.
However, what Apple has done with the iPhone yesterday is a new trick. As far as I can recall, no tech device has dropped 30% in 2 months. I seriously doubt any of the people who purchased an iPhone in the last two months could have predicted this sudden, drastic price drop.
If only Apple was as optomistic about customer loyalty/retention as you suggest.... they would offer a $200 AT&T credit to anyone who had purchased an iPhone prior to the real price being made available.
Honestly, the phone part of the iPhone is its best part. It is still the best phone I have ever used...
I feel exactly the opposite. I love everything about the device except the phone.
Then again, perhaps if the roaming service worked more than 10% of the time in my area, despite full bars, I could forgive some of the iPhones other faults (lack of voice-dialing quite accentuates the awkwardness of using the phone as a handset).
It was also a nice fuck-in-the-ass to all the ebayers who are sitting on $200 losses now...
This would be a nice consolation for my own $200 rapage, being as I absolutely detest ebay speculators, if only I actually wished misfortune on others or felt better when my own stupidity is shared.
I FELT the phone WAS worth $600 to have at launch time, full knowing there would be bugs and many features would be added over time. I fully expected the phone price would drop over time... I never imagined a 30% price drop in TWO MONTHS.
I never imagined the "price" to pay for being an Apple early adopter would be so pronounced.
What next, will the TorrentSpy sysadmins be required to *remember* everything thing single thing they do, every second of every day, from this point forward? Even if they were required remember every single detail of each day as pertains to anything done to TorrentSpy servers, this ruling would be equally as ridiculous, if not well intentioned.
Sounds like a judge who would like to understand technology, but doesn't quite grab enough fundamentals. Can they enforce such a ruling, given the programming/overhead it would take to "save" everything in RAM... is that even possible (or remotely practical, if someone *wanted* to log data which passed thru RAM)?!?
While excluding java may ensure a slightly higher level of security for the iPhone, the breadth of apps (functionality, portability, etc) missing is quite sad. I would gladly trade the lessened security of an intelligent implementation of java (user authorization, certificates/signed code, protected memory, etc) for the features java could add to this otherwise phenomenal device.
Had a clerk who was unable to type with both hands bring in one of her own. She did just fine in a demanding, fast paced environment (ER Patient Registration).
For what it's worth, I could never get the hang of it. Would certainly take some time to learn. Perhaps as much time (if not more) than learning an alternate full sized KB layout.
The thing I really don't understand here is that if these companies are selling their own product, don't they set the minimum price by virtue of what price they accept to sell their product to retailer/wholesellers? Unless we are talking counter-fit products, how can a official/legitimate product be sold for too little unless the product manufacturer (trademark holder) is selling it for too little in the first place? Even more so, if a product is going through at least one "middle-man" in the first place, before they end up online auctions, wouldn't that increase the final consumer price (be if online auction, online store, or even brick and mortar) granting that both the manufacturer and wholesaler/retailer are making some margin of profit?
Doesn't this all come down to supply and demand? Any given product will sell for what the market will bare (how ever much consumers are willing to pay). Doesn't it stand to reason that if a company complains they may go out of business because their product is being sold for too little, there is absolutely no one to blame but themselves?!?
That's messed up! This is EXACTLY why people loathe police.
This reminds me, I've been thinking about installing a few wireless networked security cameras in my home, simply because they are so inexpensive and easy to operate...
I wonder if it would be "wiretapping" to film police, unbeknown to them, in my own home??
Police, in America less so than elsewhere, are basically fascists. There are good guys which always include them, and bad guys, (more often than not, you)...
This is the heart of the matter, isn't it? No matter how you spin it. The reality is the same, world over.
Police "decide" on the fly what is legal and what is not. It's up to the legal system, er...money (as the post above has pointed out), to ultimately justify or sanction the decisions of the police.
The only real "exception" here (again, as pointed about above), is film evidence. Hence, for 99.999% of police officers, whether they themselves are good or bad, filming them in action is illegal...
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who believes Apple did not deliberately lock/brick the iPhone is either blind or naive.
What sort of "tools" did they film? Nothing specific mentioned in the article.
Body armor, biomedical, and unmanned aircraft are nice and all... but what I really want to know is when will this super-plastic will be used in new cars?!
For years cars have been getting heavier and heavier in the name of safety. It's about time someone comes up with something to make cars LIGHTER! While my motivation is purely motivated for better performance, there's got to be some practical benefits such as fuel economy for lighter (faster) cars!!
Agreed. While I appreciate your willingness to take a personal stance, there's little-to-no chance of buying consumer electronics 100% guilt-free. That's not the world we live in.
If you do want to ease your conscience and support a good cause, how about OLPC? http://www.xogiving.org/
You're dead wrong and you're missing the point entirely, like so many posts below (and before).
This IS is price gouging, plain and simple. Worse than that, it is HORRIBLE customer relations, at time when perhaps Apple should be riding their impressive market upturn. From my own perspective, having just come on board with Apple last year with the switch to intel processors, I was beginning to appreciate the Apple OS _and_ philosophy. I own two Mac Mini's, one MacBook, and now an iPhone. All along, I was happy to pay the marked price premium... for design, aesthetic AND, well thought out interfaces (usability/function). THIS is what apple sells and why they are more "exclusive" (highly regarded/perceived). I see the he "apple tax" not so much a "look at me, look what I have". It is the price for superior engineering. There is (was) greater VALUE in Apple products due not only to their design, but due to their intuitive function.... Until now.
Bottom-line, this was a HORRIBLE move by Apple. People can turn the cold shoulder, claiming early adopters got what they (we) deserve and that they are being unreasonable. I say, those calling this anything but a kick in the teeth are blind or vindictive. Ala, Nelson Munch... "Haha".
Never before, that I'm aware of, has there been such a sudden and drastic price drop on the latest must have gadget. More than harming Apple's credibility, I'm thinking many who would have continued being early adopter consumers may now think again before opening our wallets. Hell! Perhaps Apple has done us a favor, brining us to our senses? Still, is this a lessen Job wants in on? Is this his form of social commentary?? Talk about biting the hand that feeds.
No idea why the ability to categorize ON the phone wasn't included. Then again, many of the omissions of this phone baffle me (GPS, multiple SMS recipients, MMS, iChat, etc).
As someone already posted down a bit further, aside from 3G, the most critical features missing I estimate are:
1) SDK 2) Uncrippled Bluetooth
iPhone Dev's sure are doing well without an SDK!
How frustrating!! Both the slashdot article title and that submitted by the anonymous users are decidedly misleading. "Fight off the independent iPhone developers" is NOT the same as protecting the phone against being unlocked, which is what Jobs addressed.
When I first saw the title of this article I was concerned that Apple had decided to actively block iPhone app developement. Here I was thinking to myself, if Apple decides to lock out the amazing plethora of third party apps already out there, I'm done.
I really don't know what all the fuss was/is about. Having played this game on both PC and 360, I wasn't impressed in the slightest. Sorry!
In my experience as a sysadmin for 350 node hospital, wireless networks are far too prone to intermittent failure. In all fairness, I've yet to implement enterprise level wireless routers, for the main reason that most hardware claiming "industrial strength" tends to price itself more than simply running lines.
Close, but still not the same.
How long did it take before the PS3 and Zune dropped 15%, 8 months? Both of those figures are a far cry from 2 months and 30%.
My point is that had Apple waited 6 months and only dropped the price 15%, AS IS THE NORM, I would not be so disappointed. As is, EVEN with a $100 STORE CREDIT, Apple screwed up on this one. No company has ever made such a large and quick price drop on a new tech product for a simple reason, it's absolutely horrible for customer retention.
What were they thinking!?
$100 store credit is a slap in the face. $200 STORE CREDIT would have been a nice gesture. As is, Apple is only digging themselves deeper in my estimation. Attempting to lure customers to spend MORE money in your store after such an ridiculous pricing debacle is disappointing... I would expect better of Apple.
2 years != 2 months. With such an articulate post, I'm surprised by the horribly fallacious comparison.
Your analogies are close, but miss the real point.
Yes, tech toys have and will always depreciate greatly in the first YEAR or more. Any tech-addict can tell you this. Any honest tech-addict will also tell you they are willingly (knowingly) paying the early adopter "fee". Similarly, most as Apple customers are happy (and aware) they are paying the Apple premium.
However, what Apple has done with the iPhone yesterday is a new trick. As far as I can recall, no tech device has dropped 30% in 2 months. I seriously doubt any of the people who purchased an iPhone in the last two months could have predicted this sudden, drastic price drop.
If only Apple was as optomistic about customer loyalty/retention as you suggest.... they would offer a $200 AT&T credit to anyone who had purchased an iPhone prior to the real price being made available.
Honestly, the phone part of the iPhone is its best part. It is still the best phone I have ever used...
I feel exactly the opposite. I love everything about the device except the phone.
Then again, perhaps if the roaming service worked more than 10% of the time in my area, despite full bars, I could forgive some of the iPhones other faults (lack of voice-dialing quite accentuates the awkwardness of using the phone as a handset).
It was also a nice fuck-in-the-ass to all the ebayers who are sitting on $200 losses now...
This would be a nice consolation for my own $200 rapage, being as I absolutely detest ebay speculators, if only I actually wished misfortune on others or felt better when my own stupidity is shared.
Couldn't agree more.
I FELT the phone WAS worth $600 to have at launch time, full knowing there would be bugs and many features would be added over time. I fully expected the phone price would drop over time... I never imagined a 30% price drop in TWO MONTHS.
I never imagined the "price" to pay for being an Apple early adopter would be so pronounced.
What next, will the TorrentSpy sysadmins be required to *remember* everything thing single thing they do, every second of every day, from this point forward? Even if they were required remember every single detail of each day as pertains to anything done to TorrentSpy servers, this ruling would be equally as ridiculous, if not well intentioned.
Sounds like a judge who would like to understand technology, but doesn't quite grab enough fundamentals. Can they enforce such a ruling, given the programming/overhead it would take to "save" everything in RAM... is that even possible (or remotely practical, if someone *wanted* to log data which passed thru RAM)?!?
While excluding java may ensure a slightly higher level of security for the iPhone, the breadth of apps (functionality, portability, etc) missing is quite sad. I would gladly trade the lessened security of an intelligent implementation of java (user authorization, certificates/signed code, protected memory, etc) for the features java could add to this otherwise phenomenal device.
Posted from my iPhone
We've been using these for years:
m ber=12
http://www.infogrip.com/product_view.asp?RecordNu
Had a clerk who was unable to type with both hands bring in one of her own. She did just fine in a demanding, fast paced environment (ER Patient Registration).
For what it's worth, I could never get the hang of it. Would certainly take some time to learn. Perhaps as much time (if not more) than learning an alternate full sized KB layout.
Sounds like a thinly veiled attempt to scare potential Linux users...
The thing I really don't understand here is that if these companies are selling their own product, don't they set the minimum price by virtue of what price they accept to sell their product to retailer/wholesellers? Unless we are talking counter-fit products, how can a official/legitimate product be sold for too little unless the product manufacturer (trademark holder) is selling it for too little in the first place? Even more so, if a product is going through at least one "middle-man" in the first place, before they end up online auctions, wouldn't that increase the final consumer price (be if online auction, online store, or even brick and mortar) granting that both the manufacturer and wholesaler/retailer are making some margin of profit?
Doesn't this all come down to supply and demand? Any given product will sell for what the market will bare (how ever much consumers are willing to pay). Doesn't it stand to reason that if a company complains they may go out of business because their product is being sold for too little, there is absolutely no one to blame but themselves?!?
Anyone else think Ghost was canceled ("failed") because every Blizzard resource (and then some) was poured into World of Warcraft?
That's messed up! This is EXACTLY why people loathe police.
This reminds me, I've been thinking about installing a few wireless networked security cameras in my home, simply because they are so inexpensive and easy to operate...
I wonder if it would be "wiretapping" to film police, unbeknown to them, in my own home??
Police, in America less so than elsewhere, are basically fascists. There are good guys which always include them, and bad guys, (more often than not, you)...
This is the heart of the matter, isn't it? No matter how you spin it. The reality is the same, world over.
Police "decide" on the fly what is legal and what is not. It's up to the legal system, er...money (as the post above has pointed out), to ultimately justify or sanction the decisions of the police.
The only real "exception" here (again, as pointed about above), is film evidence. Hence, for 99.999% of police officers, whether they themselves are good or bad, filming them in action is illegal...
Think I've seen/read about this movie. I'll have to look it up. Sounds so strangely familiar, but I can't place it! Where's my own "Zoe" chip?!